CLAUSE 28.—(Licences of drivers of heavy goods vehicles.) (Hansard, 29 June 1934)

§ Captain STRICKLAND
I beg to move, in page 20, line 2, to leave out "vehicles" and to insert: heavy goods vehicles as defined in this section. The purpose of this Amendment is to draw a distinction between the heavy articulated vehicle, and to limit the application of the Clause requiring a special licence for drivers of heavy vehicles. As the Clause stands the provisions with regard to special drivers' licences apply to all classes of articulated vehicles. There are many such vehicles in ordinary use with a weight of considerably less than 2½ tons, and they are capable of being driven as easily and as safely as any other design of vehicle of the same weight on four or six wheels. This point was raised in Committee. The Minister then objected to the form of the Amendment, and, the present Amendment has been re-drafted in order to meet his objection.

§ Mr. JANNER
I beg to second the Amendment.

Mr. STANLEY
The hon. and gallant Member is mistaken when he says that in Committee I object to the form of this Amendment. I objected to the principle, 1466 and I still object to it. The object of the Amendment is to treat as light and heavy goods vehicles that particular class of vehicle which is commonly known as the mechanical horse. It has a light chassis, which itself would come within the light vehicle class, but it is capable of having superimposed upon it a trailer of great weight. I have seen one which is designed to draw a thousand gallons tank. It is clear that a combined vehicle of that nature comes within the category of heavy goods vehicles which requires all the skill, perhaps more, which an ordinary heavy goods vehicle requires on the part of the driver. In those circumstances I see no reason to differentiate between the driving test which would have to be passed by the driver of a heavy vehicle and the driver of this vehicle.

§ Captain STRICKLAND
Does the Minister make no difference at all between the light articulated vehicle with an unladen weight of 2½ tons and such a vehicle as he is foreshadowing to the House—a large oil tanker? I have not that type in my mind at all.

Mr. STANLEY
I do not think that my hon. and gallant Friend has succeeded in making his point quite plain. We can discuss the matter with him between now and another place, but it must be clear that I do not accept any Amendment which would enable vehicles of the categories to which I have referred to be treated as light vehicles.

§ Captain STRICKLAND
I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.

§ Mr. JANNER
I beg to move, in page 20, line 6, to leave out from "test" to the end of the Sub-section.
In considering this Clause it should be remembered that the system of special licences will create an obstacle in the way of an unemployed man getting suitable employment as the driver of a heavy goods vehicle. I have here an illustration from a very important source, the Secretary of the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders, which shows how this kind of legislation will affect an applicant for a licence to drive a public passenger service vehicle. He writes that a case has just come to his notice of an unemployed man who for 18 years 1467 has held an unendorsed driving licence and has driven every conceivable kind of heavy vehicle. On application to the Metropolitan Police the man had been instructed as follows: That he has to produce his driving licence, costing 5s.; a medical certificate, costing 8s.; he has to make a deposit of 3s. 6d., and 1s. for the licence, with 2s. 6d. for the badge; and in addition he has to produce a vehicle costing over £1,000 to enable him to be tested as a driver. That is all in the terms of the Road Traffic Act of 1930, and the regulations which follow upon that. It appears now that this Bill is going to repeat the same idea with regard to goods vehicles.
I think the House will appreciate how great the difficulty in this regard will be. We know that in some cases the owners are good enough to lend vehicles for a test, but we can quite understand that most of them would be very reluctant indeed to lend for the first test the use of a vehicle; and of course it is important to realise that no person can get employment as such a driver unless he has a licence. It may be argued that in the omnibus industry it is comparatively easy for an intending employé to be provided with an omnibus for the purpose of the test, but the omnibus industry is obviously much more closed, in the sense of employment, than is the goods vehicle industry, in which there are many small owners. It is quite possible, of course, that the person who is going to employ a man might be sufficiently interested in him to lend him his vehicle for the purposes of a test, but I think that most people will be very reluctant indeed to let their vehicles out for the purpose and the reasons must be obvious. I ask the Minister not to place additional difficulties in the way of those who are earnestly seeking employment.

§ Mr. T. SMITH
I beg to second the Amendment.

§ Lieut.-Colonel HEADLAM
If this Amendment were accepted it would mean that the licensing authorities would have to keep a variety of vehicles for testing purposes, to enable them to test the merits of applicants for licences. That is obviously not a practicable proposition. 1468 The hon. Member really gave an answer to his own question by suggesting that employers who are about to take on a man would supply vehicles for testing purposes. I know the hon. Member suggested that few employers would do that, but surely if an employer wished to take on a man to drive a vehicle it would be reasonable for him to lend a vehicle for the purpose of the test. Anyway, I think that that would be a solution of the problem, and I cannot possibly accept the Amendment.

§ Mr. JANNER
Does the Parliamentary Secretary suggest that private individuals should take the risk of having their cars disturbed whereas the public funds are available to do it in cases of this description? This test is for the purpose of protection, and this is a public duty, not a private one. Would the hon. Gentleman answer my point as to the difficulty men will have in obtaining employment?

§ Lieut.-Colonel HEADLAM
I am supposing that if a man is anxious to drive a vehicle of this description and he gets someone willing to employ him, the employer would be sufficiently interested to supply him with a vehicle for the purpose of a test.